Many of Domtar’s Mills are integrated. That means there’s a Fiberline and a Paper Machine department. There’s a bit of pride in the groups, and this leads to some good natured ribbing. Papermakers often refer to the Fiberline as “the back end of the mill”. Papermakers are directly involved in the production of the final product and they naturally feel they are the most important part of the operation. Fiberline workers hear this and just shake their heads. The raw materials come in to the Fiberline where they are processed and made ready for making paper. Since the process begins in the Fiberline, it’s obvious that the Paper Machines are “the back end of the mill”.

So who is right?

It doesn’t matter where the mill is, Papermakers and Fiberline workers are as different as night and day, yet they both are critical in making a mill run. The differences in their point of view can be attributed to the process they work in. In a Fiberline, the process takes anywhere from 12 to 24 hours to complete. On a paper machine, it’s a matter of seconds. An operator makes a change in the Fiberline, and it could take hours, or even days, to see the result. Papermakers have seconds to act and operate under constant pressure to “keep the sheet on the reel”.

The reality is that an integrated mill’s manufacturing process is a system, where each piece is interconnected and relies on the smooth operation of the step that precedes and follows it. From woodyard to digester to paper machine to converting to shipping to sales and support…every step of the way, every step is as important as the next.

But for a simpler answer to the question, “who’s right?” Ask the folks who work in the Recovery and Utilities area (the place where the steam and power are produced) …they’ll say that nothing runs without them!

This article was first published on our blog Fiberlines: an online space where you’ll get insights about our business and our products, stories about our host communities, and opinion about industry innovation and sustainability trends.

World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim announced a groundbreaking new initiative to reach 300 cities in developing countries over four years to help them plan for a low-carbon future and get the needed finance flowing.

An estimated 6.2 billion people – two-thirds of the world’s population – will be living in cities by 2050.

Cities already account for about two-thirds of the world’s energy consumption and about 70 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. A low-carbon development path could help them cut global greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent.

“He said that despite the failures of successive governments – including his own 1992-2000 administration in the US – to forge working treaties on climate change, and to cut greenhouse gas emissions, people should take the initiative by working together and individually to reduce their own impact on the environment. He pointed to the work of the biologist EO Wilson, whose most recent work suggests that human beings and other complex natural societies prosper through co-operation. “I believe that in a complex world … these creative networks of co-operation have to triumph over conflict-driven models,” said Clinton.”

“Peter Busbyof powerhouse architecture firm Perkins+Will has made it his mission to improve people’s lives through design. His projects include the Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability (a “living lab” that generates extra power for the University of British Columbia campus) and Dockside Green (a mixed-use community that is one of the world’s greenest developments).

Busby recently stopped by GOOD’s headquarters and talked to us about the components of sustainable design and how a background in philosophy has helped shape the way he looks at his work. Watch our GOOD Talks video and learn more about Busby’s work in a recent Architect feature.”

Sustainability of another sort. When manufacturing components become diminished and in short supply, there is a need for concern and a need to pre-emptively seek out alternatives.

The element indium , or more specifically indium tin oxide ( ITO ), is used extensively in high tech screens. ITO’s ideal properties to become transparent plus its tremendous ability to conduct electricity, allows our mobile phones to be smarter, our TV flatscreens to be larger and our tablet computers to be more sleek. Availability of indium is decreasing and alternative have not tet taken hold in the manufacturing process. Graphene is a potential viable alternative.

So why have we not already moved from ITO to carbon?

Mark Hersam, a carbon nanotubes pioneer at Northwestern University in Illinois, believes we’re waiting for an industry tipping point. “There’s tremendous inertia in the electronics sector because the entire industry is modelled around ITO. Big companies like Apple are wedded to the ITO manufacturing processes and will need to invest substantially to start using carbon,” he says. However, as the price of indium goes up and it becomes harder to get hold of, there is likely to be a switch.”

With solar cells and electronics all competing for the same rare metal, industry is already under increasing pressure to start using a different material, whether that’s another metal oxide or novel carbon chicken-wire. Looking through the breathless coverage of the iPad 3 launch on my phone, one thing is for sure: our unwavering enthusiasm for touchscreen/display-screen technologies means we desperately need to find alternatives soon. ”

“Sustainability is an honest attempt to create positive social, environmental, and economic impacts through transparent organizational and sustainable performance.”

Among people engaged in the sustainability movement in its many variations, most talk about ‘People, Planet, Profit’—the ‘triple bottom line’ of sustainable enterprises. At a recent conference, though, a person I respect added two more words: Passion and Purpose.

These are vital and powerful additions to the worn triple bottom line metaphor: When there is no passion and when work is not undertaken with an inspiring purpose, strategy often fades from active consideration as mitigating or ‘normal’ business factors intrude. The original intent is diluted when actions don’t follow leaving financial considerations to reemerge as the only imperatives.

Broadly speaking, then, sustainability is about shifting mindsets: How can we evolve social norms inside organizations to think about sustainability proactively and embed sustainable perspectives in day-to-day decision-making? For many in third world economies, sustainability is simply about creating a life that is acceptable as a community and even a nation. What can we learn from this perspective?

In a Washington Post article today, “Giving is Personal. Make it Political,” the writer expresses the surprising strength of the status quo: What is reasonable and acceptable is still being defined by a small group remote from where this ‘normality’ will be established—rather than being defined by local members of affected communities, based on their real current needs and cultural beliefs. Creating change is about changing the mindset of the global population: Real, lasting progress on sustainability needs to be part of who we are as a global society—not the exception of individual choice and expression.

Shifting mindsets requires more than rational arguments: Minds are changed when people and communities see a vision of a better life—Purpose—and are inspired to pursue it—Passion.

Five Ps sustainability balances people, planet and profit, while also engaging communities—political or corporate—to see their day-to-day work in a broader context, and energizing them to pursue the grand vision. Leaders cannot impose their own values on their communities. Instead, they must engage and cultivate the values of the culture that already exists. (And that’s a significant part of Manzimvula’s approach.)